Contents

Anime/Manga Colored

I don't see anything in here about keeping colored manga scans over anime screenshots... I think that it might be a good idea to add that. - SimAnt 17:18, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the standard was, we use colored manga images until the anime catches up to it, then we use the anime image. If that is to change then I'd think it'd be a nice discussion.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 20:15, May 1, 2010 (UTC)

I just feel that both being colored, and both being still frames, the better choice is the original source if they are both in color, if its unavailable in color then anime is appropriate unless their are serious artistic mistakes (such as with File:Founding Uchiha.png). - SimAnt 20:48, May 1, 2010 (UTC)

Amendment: Anime/Manga Colored

Because I expect and edit war in the wake of Konan's page, I feel it's high time we sit down and talk about this. Now I don't want to begin unneedingly wordy, but the current policy states that if an image is colored in the manga, it be used over the anime. That's fine and dandy, but also unnecessary if the image doesn't have a real noticeable difference. Using the Konan as an example, the only difference is the color of their eyes, that's not a real importance difference, as her eyes have never been a plot point or anything major like that.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 15:40, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with ShounenSuki to an extent, but eye color discrepancy isn't something I notice unless pointed out to me. Therefore, it's not one of my top priorities. ~SnapperTo 16:27, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

I would say we need to discuss this heavily, mainly because Konan's page is the third time there have been disputes about choosing coloured manga instead of anime. To be honest i believe that we should make it so that anime images are always used when possible, seeing how it would keep a curtain level of consistency. Could we perhaps get an idea about the community's opinion by using some sort of vote? --Gojita (talk) 16:50, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Isn't that the point of "If an anime image poorly represents a scene"? Edit: Never-mind that, read wrong part of policy... But what is wrong with going with accuracy over consistency? SimAnt 19:08, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly what SimAnt said. To be honest the colored manga images are a perfect depiction of the mangaka's own work and not the interpretation that the animators decide on. So why not use their own art work when possible? --Cerez365 (talk) 19:14, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

First of all: It is a rarity to get good quality coloured images from Kishimoto. Second of all, when we edit many of theese images to remove unnesecary parts of it, they tend to ruin the flow(An amendment) of the pages. Seeing the size and form of the Shikamaru Part II image added by ShounenSuki, it sorta tilts the entire page when you look at it compared to the many other smaller images that also fits better with the written text and headlines withouth us having to use {{-}}. We have had this discussion before when ShounenSuki added the coloured manga image of Jiraiya in the infobox and it was mainly decided to use an anime image, mainly due to the size, but i also think it have something do with the how it was coloured compared to the anime. And yes i know that Kishimoto might not have much to say when they do the anime, but nontheless seeing how most users on this wikia is quick to change the manga images to anime images as soon as possible, i don't see the reason why a coloured manga image is used by default! --Gojita (talk) 19:34, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Kishimoto's version is accurate. For some reason (correct me if I'm wrong) I thought the goal of an encyclopedia was to accurately document a subject. Just because something is not in a standard television/computer ratio, doesn't make it bad or inaccurate. The only reason that I am aware of that the manga images were not kept in the infobox, is that the infobox was designed for quick access to statistics/information about a subject, and a wide image works better for how the information is displayed. SimAnt 19:55, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

You do realize that you reasoning might as well mean the change of every single anime image on this wikia back to a manga image. The way things have been done for years on this wikia as i see it, is that most users prefer the anime images instead of any coloured manga image. The only reason why this have changed as of late is because of ShounenSuki's almoust (sorry for elaborating it like this, but still) fanatic obsession of using the coloured manga images when possible that has somehow been shared by a few other users, while the majority of this wikia still adds anime images when they finally appear. I can image this problem will arise with the five kages and their aids that we currently have coloured manga images of, but i believe that many users will try to upload the anime versions instead, no matter what four of five users might think. My reasoning here is that the majority of the users disagree with the purpose of accurately when it comes to theese images. Also i would like to add the reasoning of some of our major contributors during the discussion of the Jiraiya Image:

(TheUltimate3)"I see a sudden (and to me unnecessary) massive change of everyone's infobox turning into manga images at the end of this discussion. That being said, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the image we already have"

(AlienGAmer)"the anime IS done by permission from the author. I doubt MK will authorize something he disapproves. And Manga imapges have a very limited colour depth, where as in the Anime, u'r not held back by those limitations"

Althought i think that TheUltimate3 have turned neutral since then, his point is still valid. --Gojita (talk) 20:14, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Color depth doesn't mean anything if it's not the original source, also this isn't about what MK authorizes, this is about using the original source when the secondary source screws up. SimAnt 20:25, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Which they rarely do, and even so we seem to be able to work our way around(Naruto's six and eight tailed forms in the anime). Also my main point(i will try to shorten my reasoning) was that most contributors on this wikia will always choose anime images over anyting else. And it also done alike on many other wikias. --Gojita (talk) 20:30, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

isn't this a manga/artbook picture of luffy? SimAnt 20:48, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

actually no, that is from a gameart. And that is one wikia. Let me try and list the majors. Bleach, Dragonball, most of One Piece, FMA, Hellsing, Yu Gi Oh and seriously i am not in the mood of going on! Refering simply to our own, choosing Anime images over coloured manga images have always been done seemingly, until ShounenSuki got the idea to use Colourd Manga images and suddenly a few of the major contributors jumped on the waggon withouth even considering what the majority of the contributors on this wikia constantly decide on.

To set an example with the Konan page. If i remember correctly the coloured manga image that was recently added came out before her appearance in the anime and so it was used. But when she appeared in the anime, that image was used instead and have been for quite some time now. Now to refere to the quote by TheUltimate3 and his/hers point, suddenly ShounenSuki had this urge to change all other images to coloured manga images in some of the Infoboxes even though most contributors clearly seems to prefere the anime images.

I mean look at the upload log each time a new episode airs and finally shows techniques characters and a like, many people upload the images relevant such as images for the infobox, scenes and techniques. And i believe that since a majority feels and acts that way, the Amendment should be changed so that no type of image is used by default, but rather which image the majority of the community prefers, which in this case actually is the anime version(when a good quality version excists)

So please stop this obsession about beeing accurate, using Kishimoto's original drawings, when the majority of contributors seems to prefere the anime versions. BTW sorry for pointing fingers, but i thought it would be interesting to point out were all of this began--Gojita (talk) 21:17, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

First I would like to say that I'min the middle of studying so I am in the library typing on a iPod touch so this will be short. My issue is not an issue of accuracy, it's about page flow. Randomly jumping from manga to anime just because kKishimoto decided he was going to color a page this week screws with the flow. also there is no need for anyone to get so hostile with each other or point fingers let's keep this orderly.--131.118.85.55 (talk) 22:39, September 29, 2010 (UTC) TheUltimate3

Thank you for clearing that and as said before, sorry for pointing fingers. --Gojita (talk) 22:51, September 29, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Having images from various different media in no way disrupts the flow of a page. In fact, encyclopædia and related works have done exactly that for as long as they've included images, without any complaints.

There is also no way you can use your common sense and still say it's not detrimental to a page to have not even a single image drawn by the original author of the series.

Let me explain my view about this in detail:

First of all, I identify several different images with different needs.

The main profile image.

This image should, above all, allow instant recognition of what the page represents. To do so, it should be accurate and clear. As it is the most representative image of the page, it should preferably be in the same style as the rest of the main profile images, but this is an æsthetic wish that falls below accuracy. Only the smallest of errors should be allowed in this image, if absolutely necessary. Having a major feature like eyes be in the colour is simply against what an encyclopædia should stand for.

The appearance images.

These images show how a character is supposed to look like. Therefore, they should be near-flawless and show as much of the character as possible. They should also, if possible, be drawn by the original author, as his art is the original source and not a second-hand interpretation of it. Only if no good coloured image is available should an image from another source be allowed and only if that images has no identifiable errors.

Flavour images.

These images add flavour to the page by depicting scenes, events, or subjects described in the text. Any image depicts what it is supposed to represent in a clear and easily recognisable way is fine. Perfect accuracy is not as important here, so using anime images is perfectly fine. However, as always, no blatant errors should be visible. Small errors can be overlooked, though.

This is the way I think we should decide what images to use where. I'm not against anime images and even think they are vital to a good representation of the series and its contents. However, I think the same about manga images and I do hold them in higher regard, given how they're drawn by the original author.

As for how other wikis works, well, that doesn't matter, now does it? We have no affiliation with those wikis, nor is there any reason we should emulate them. I am an editor on this wiki and I want this wiki to have the highest possible quality and the best and most accurate information. Images are a part of this.

The crux of your argument, would be, what is considered "minor". For example, the two of us differ on how important the color of ones eyes are. To you, it's a critical, make or break thing. For me, unless it's a dojutsu or something important enough to elaborated in the story, eye color is just eye color, nothing special, nothing important.

That part being said, if one art is near identical to another, in my opinion, either one would be fine. This was mainly in response to the "Appearance" section you mention ShounenSuki.

And finally, I want to point out, I normally wouldn't have manga images. My problem is that the policy is very make or break. For all extensive purposes, it renders things uneditable, because it is very hard biased into one thing. That is my issue with it.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 02:58, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Eyes are one of the most defining features of a manga character. They are highly distinctive and can be extremely symbolic. For instance, Yahiko's eyes are blue to show innocence, his good heart, and his similarity to Naruto. Them being brown in the anime destroys this. Besides, even in real life eyes are highly important. What is the first thing you would normally say when describing your appearance? Hair and eye colour.

Let me ask you something, you wouldn't want a single manga image on this wiki? Despite all the bad art in the anime? Despite all the errors? Despite the manga actually being the original source? Wou would actually argue that you'd want an encyclopædia without showing any art from the original author? —ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 12:46, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Now that is interesting, because I always give broad features when describing myself or others (Skin color, height, weight, ect) hair and eyes always blended together. Then again it could be because, hair and eye color are pretty much the same amongst black and asian folk I hang out with. Go figure.

That's not what I said. Like I said, I have no problem with either, my problem is the policy is to make or break. A good anime image can portray something just as well as a good manga image, but the policy forces the use of the manga image regardless of anything. Like I said, it makes things uneditable, and that is my primary concern.

To give an example, lets say someone changes the infobox picture of Naruto, into something different, the new picture of Naruto is just as good as the old one, so it can stay, and the world keeps on spinnin'. Now that new picture of Naruto is replaced by a manga image of Naruto. Now both the new image and the new manga image are both good, it passes so to speak and the world keeps on spinnin' once more. Now later, someone uploads another picture of Naruto, this time from the anime and it's again a good image that serves it's purpose. Now all of a sudden, it cannot be used because it's an anime picture, despite it being in no way worse than the manga image.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 13:33, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

You mean that when changing an anime image to a manga, its done without fuss, but to do the opposite, long debates on the Talk page have to be held?..AlienGamer(Userpage ⁝ Talk) 13:45, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

That's logical, isn't it? First of all, why would a perfectly good image need to be changed? Second of all, manga images have preference because they come from the original source.

However, as I explained above, I actually prefer anime images in the infobox. They should show as much consistency with the rest of the wiki as possible and most of the time, we will have anime images there. Only when no flawless anime images can be found, should a manga image be used.

The infobox should get and anime image. If no flawless anime image is available, a coloured manga image should be used. If no coloured manga image is available, an anime image should be used with as little errors as possible. If the errors are too great and obvious (as with Hanzō's image), a black-and-white manga image should be used.

The appearance image should get a coloured, full-body manga image. If none is available, a flawless, full-body anime image should be used. If one doesn't exist, a coloured manga image that shows as much as possible should be used. If that doesn't exist, we go back to a flawless anime image. If that doesn't exist, an anime image with as little flaws as possible should be used and any flaws in the image should be clearly noted. If the only anime images available are those with major flaws, we should use a black-and-white manga image and a flawed anime image, to clearly show the differences.

All other images should be from the anime, unless they somehow do not represent the scene they are supposed to represent well. If this is the case, unless the scene is extremely important, the image should be replaced with an anime image of another scene. If the scene is too important, a coloured manga image should be used. If none is available and the scene is absolutely vital, a black-and-white manga image should be used. I doubt this will ever happen, though, unless the anime suddenly decides to completely screw over a certain scene.

Really, I prefer to see anime images in almost every place, except for the appearance sections. I am only against anime images in other places if they are obviously flawed, as we have to keep accuracy our number one goal. With a well-written image policies, long debates can be prevented. We just have to decide, for one and for all, what kind of images we want where. –ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 13:59, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

What about images like this? Technically, the only thing wrong with the anime pic counter part, is an eye missing on one of the Uchiha's forehead, but if you take into account that the manga image is covered in White Holes, covering most of the Founders, then the anime pic isn't that bad to warrrent it not being used, if you get what I mean...AlienGamer(Userpage ⁝ Talk) 14:26, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

And about the eye colour thing, I have to agree with TheUltimate3, not because I like Anime Images, but because, the change was so small, that in both Yahiko and Konan's pics, it took months to notice, thats how small the change was...AlienGamer(Userpage ⁝ Talk) 14:38, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

for that specific image, I would say the anime version would do fine. It's not about that Uchiha specifically, it really is just flavouring the page. A small error like that is not that important and we could always just make a small note under the image or in the trivia section.

As for the eye colour thing, not noticing the change doesn't mean it isn't important. We've had very little coloured images of them in the manga and only a rare few people would have seen both images side to side. The changes not being noticed for a long time is not a good indication of their importance. As I've said before, in both characterisation, identification, and symbolism, the eyes are extremely important. Important enough to want to depict them properly. —ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 14:58, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

The accuracy, however important it is to an encyclopedia, seems to loose it's importance, when the majority of the contributors would rather focus on the usage of an anime image instead. THAT IS THE PREFERENCE OF THE MAJORITY OF OUR CONTRIBUTORS, JUST LOOK AT THE FREAKING UPLOAD LOG! now that i have said it like that i think i will withdraw from this discussion for some time to cool down and enjoy the headache i have gotten from writting the same argument over and over again. --Gojita (talk) 16:09, September 30, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Accuracy vs Majority, Accuracy wins...but Consistancy also has to be taken into account, so....AlienGamer(Userpage ⁝ Talk) 16:12, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

MY pint exactly. The consistancy on this wikia is that we use anime images as a majority and therefor i believe that we can subside coloured manga images that is used for more accuracy, especially when most people seem to favor something else. --Gojita (talk) 16:31, September 30, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

I would like to point out, that this discussion is still going, so rampant image swapping is a no no.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 18:26, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Btw Gojita, dont get me wrong, ShounenSuki's accuracy point is still very good, and his image preference (which he's given on top) does make sense, but if a full body image that takes up 4-5 sections, its a tad too big dont you think ShouenSuki, it limits the pics you can put to the other sections, and when you have to scroll down to see the full pic, well....AlienGamer(Userpage ⁝ Talk) 19:04, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

As far as infobox images go, technically there is a way to please both parties, though in my opinion it would require too much effort: slides. Put a manga image and an anime image, and let it change. It might be distracting but it also saves space. The potentially hard part is adapting the slide code to the infobox. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 20:36, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

If we are to have accuracy, we will never have true consistency. There are simply too many mistakes and changes in the anime that will never be fixed and there are and will be things in the manga that will never be shown in the anime and vice versa. Take other media into account and things get even further from consistency.

The size issue, I don't really see. The images aren't that big and important enough to warrant the extra attention. Making them smaller would actually be detrimental to their function, even if they were taken from the anime. Making them smaller would either mean they cannot be full body shots or they are too small to be easily viewable. We shouldn't make our readers have to click on the image to make them useful.

I'll admit that this might take up space that would otherwise be used for other images, but those images are simply not as important as an appearance image. Showing Shikamaru talking to Shiho or Ino crying over Shizune's body isn't as important as showing what these characters look like. —ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 21:23, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

(Kinda-Sorta-Caught-Up) Size is really a big factor. A smaller image with the same detail is just as good as a large image, except it's less of a eye sore if you will. Having one image cut through 2 or more sub-sections is distracting to people reading. That can be remedied by just opening image editing software and resizing the image though so that really has no effect on this whole anime/manga issue.

Now that being said, personally, I would prefer anime images in the infoboxes. THey are easier to get for most members, RAWs tend to be grainy, and both RAW and volume images are hard to come by. This does not mean, manga pictures shouldn't get used, not by a long shot, there is a reason why sections like Appearance exist in the first place. But like I said, my real issue is how black and white the current policy is. It makes it so new editors are unable to edit.--TheUltimate3~The User King~ 21:36, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

Have anyone considered that size of the images may become even more important now seeing how the new look on wikia seems to compress the articles.[1] just take a look at this image Dantman uploaded some time ago. --Gojita (talk) 15:38, October 3, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

On a side note, about infobox images, would be great if they would all look nice in something like this, if we ever wanted to go down that path... SimAnt 02:11, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Simant, I trust in your black wiki magic to develop a mockup of a infobox that incorporates that mechanic. Go go go.--TheUltimate3~The User King~ 15:58, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Eh, i just stole that from software.wikia.com, you mean an infobox that can use slideshow? SimAnt 16:01, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Currently on hiatus as the whole Wikia Crisis is a far more pressing matter. >.>--TheUltimate3~The User King~ 12:27, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

Some notes about the infobox slideshow:

A. Users without javascript wouldn't be able to see it. If there was a way to detect whether the user had javascript, and use that in an #if statement, that would solve that.

B. I can't find anyway to count newlines (or any escaped character) without resorting to a new string extension or (new variable extension (any ways to do it with the current extensions would be nice...), and without that I wouldn't know how to differentiate between the number of images, so I couldn't use the normal layout for a single image and the slideshow for multiple images. SimAnt 21:25, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

There are 3 lines in this example. For noscript you "might" be able to add a .noscript class and use js to add ".noscript { display: none; }" to all pages. ~NOTASTAFFDaniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire)(talk)Oct 28, 2010 @ 22:28 (UTC) 22:28, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

That first part will work and #arraymap accepts \n as a delimiter. Just gotta get it to display normal images then when javascript fails. SimAnt 22:49, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Current gallery slideshow will require shrinking the image a bit more since the side arrows take up about 5px or so each. http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SmoothGallery#Arguments has a fallback argument for javascript failing or being disabled. Also it allows for more customization, such as disabling the arrows, customizable height and manually setting a timer for how long each image displays. It is already on Wikia. I don't know how stable it is. As for the current mockup.SimAnt 20:14, October 29, 2010 (UTC)

The Discussion Revitalised

Screw the new Wikia look issue, we can have two discussions at once. I think I made my opinion on what kind of images should be used where quite clear above. I haven't said anything about multiple images in the infobox, though. I don't think that will work. I sincerely dislike slide shows and the like. However, I have seen infoboxes on other wikias that allowed one to chose which form to view through small tabs at the top. I believe the Kingdom Hearts wiki makes use of this system, amongst others. I believe that might be a better solution. —ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 15:35, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

The Wikia Crisis seems to be over for now, so this can once again become a discussion to have. That being said, I have absolutely nothing new to offer except for my bastardized compromise ment to drag people back here. I asked Simant for something, depending on his response could lead to a resolution.--TheUltimate3 ~The User King ~ 15:38, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

First of all thank you for making a new headline, makes it easier to edit and view. Would also like to point out the problem i have using the slideshow function curently used for double images in the jutsu infobox, althoug this is apparantly only due to the skin i am using, still i doubt i am the only one using the old skins, so should we not consider thoose other people as well? I have seen the option mentioned on the Kingdom Hearts wikia also beeing used by the One Piece Wikia and i also see that as a better option instead of that slideshow --Gojita (talk) 15:40, November 18, 2010 (UTC)Gojita

Yeah that tab thing could better than what I was thinking. As far as I can tell it all depends on if Simant can or will make something like that. (Because as far as I can tell, Simant is the only one where with real good knowledge on how Wikia code works. Sorry Simant...)--TheUltimate3 ~The User King ~ 15:41, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

Story: Gallery sucks badly, I want smoothgallery extension which was designed for monobook (and should work with all other skins since they are derived from it). Also it has MANY more customizations including a custom timer removing arrows, detecting lack of javascript, etc. Here is an example of smooth gallery in operation (http://smoothgallery.jondesign.net/showcase/manual-slideshow/ Warning: WeIrD images.) SimAnt 19:12, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

Ugh... Mootools... Ahhh, those horrid days dealing with v1 of Kommonwealth... *shudder* Mootools times 3 (three different versions of Mootools that is, all incompatible) @_@ a ugly hack letting them coexist by shoving parts of the system in iframes... Man, I can't think of the guy I was hired to replace as anything other than a really old script kiddie.

Personally... if I had the desire, I'd just write something custom. Give the div multiple images are in a class, look at the frame markup MediaWiki outputs, extract the images and captions, replace them by js with slideshow friendly markup, and add on the functionality. ~NOTASTAFFDaniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire)(talk)Nov 18, 2010 @ 19:32 (UTC) 19:32, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

Ddoes that mean both versions of gallery slideshows suck? And that smoothgallery won't work with all of the wikia skins? SimAnt 19:46, November 18, 2010 (UTC)

Smoothgallery uses Mootools... Wikia has jQuery... (Actually as of 1.16 MediaWiki in general has jQuery). Adding smoothgallery would require loading an entire extra fully-featured web library... That's as bad as it was when Wikia was transitioning from YUI to jQuery... @_@ And considering residual stuff, would almost be like having jQuery, YUI, and Mootools all here on Wikia... ugh. ~NOTASTAFFDaniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire)(talk)Nov 18, 2010 @ 19:50 (UTC)

So~ is the tab thing I suggested possible? Are there better solutions? Should we go back to discussing whether we want manga or anime images in the infobox? —ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 22:03, November 25, 2010 (UTC)

My ability to contribute to this discussion is mitigated by my lack of technical knowledge on wiki coding and extensions. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 22:46, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm rather hoping SimAnt or DanTMan will be able to tell us if the tab system is possible. I do think that's the best solution. If it's not possible, I'll fight to the end to keep manga images in the infobox if the anime images are under par.—ShounenSuki(talk | contribs | translations) 22:54, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

And the war will begin again. It's possible. We've all seen it several places. We, as in Simant and Dant who are the only ones who know a lick about coding, just have to pick a method we, as in they, like and go for it.-TheUltimate3 ~The User King ~ 23:58, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Non-Biased Look & Conformity

Hi, I realize I am quite late in posting this, as I was waiting for other discussions to take place... that to my knowledge never did...

What has been bothering me most with the Anime/Manga Profile pictures compromise (which I paradoxically have no problem with) is that it is only used on some characters, for odd, if any reasons, but not others, which following the same logic would require them to be included in the compromise as well.

I realize that the profile picture compromise is supposed to be a compromise on major Anime/Manga differences, which are both valid into and on themselves. However on character pages, such as Torune, who is completely covered with a mask and has no differences other then the anime style as all other pictures share, he will have two separate pictures. Or Fu (yes Tailed Beast Fu)... actually, what the heck, the other Fu to- also has no difference that I can see, relevant, or even existent, or difference that I personally do not believe anyone could tell without studying both pictures for an extended period of time, if changes are even present. While character's such as Danzo or Sasuke do not have two separate images in their profile, even though it can be argued there are differences in their portrayals, or it can be argued that there are no differences and for that reason they should have two separate images since other characters have two separate images and have no apparent differences.

HOWEVER I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE DIFFERENCES IN OPINION WILL NEVER BE SOLVED BETWEEN ANY TWO PARTIES, IN REGARD TO MINOR/MAJOR/IMPORTANT/IRRELEVANT CHANGES.

So, in my opinion, ALL characters should have both Anime/Manga pictures in their profile pictures (unless , even if no change is apparent in their forms because:

A: for any character it can be argued that they are portrayed differently in the different serializations (whether just by facial expression [such as Naruo's eyes' being ever so slightly bigger in the Anime, but no one would ever realize this] or a seemingly insignificant line slightly out of place, which could be argued to change the characters portrayal so drastically that they should be treated separate)

B: it will keep the look of the Wiki clean and consistent for every character, as it is meant to be.

C: to be non-biased as we can be for each article created and maintained.

I hope that this has not been discussed anywhere, and if it has I am sorry for not seeing it and posting this in its place. Thanks for the time. --Dragon Hacker (talk) 06:14, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

Hi friend! I think the reason some characters have two image in their infobox is to prevent issues and arguments. As we only use manga/anime images for characters with differences. Like in A for example. He has white hair in manga while he has a blond hair in anime. --Ilnarutoanime26 (Talk-Contribs.-Links) 07:19, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, however, using a previous example, why would Torune then be given two images when there is no change in hair, eye, or mask color in any way? --69.11.18.182 (talk) 16:30, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

Couldn't that be said about anyone, especially since anime portrayal style is inheritly different from manga? —This unsigned comment was made by 69.11.18.182 (talk • contribs) .

Shippuden based images

Should it be added that images from Naruto Shippuden (this relates to the episodes from after the change to 16:9) should be captured at 1080p HD for the best quality ? I'm probably going to get yelled at for suggesting this, but I feel the wiki needs to move to the 21st century for images and take advantage of the quality difference in a 1080p image.

EDIT: I saw this:

“

Avoid widescreen shots. Widescreen images sometimes contain black bars, and more importantly the large width of the images disrupts the visibility of thumbnails by increasing the amount of empty space. It's best to clip the image down to what you are actually depicting.

That is incorrect and is only relevant to all the episodes using 4:3 ratio. The 16:9 Shippuden episodes are all intended for 1080p Widescreen streaming. --Speysider (Talk Page) 15:28, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even sure I want to respond to this but here I go... Why or where exactly do you people get these sporadic fads from? One minute it's infobox riot now it's the upsurge of the 1080's. Wanting the images all in 1080p not only limits the images, but number of people that can upload images and will also cause people to have to be running behind uploaders of perfectly good images and re-upload the image because the pixels are a little better to look at? There's nothing 21st century about that- else we'd be using 3-D images and holograms in the articles. If the image is decent quality I see no need to be "1080ing" them. What of the people that won't or can't pay to watch anime on sites that provide such resolution, can't get a 1080 video or systems are unable to play those videos are they supposed to do? wait on those who can, to do what they're doing?

As for the bit you took from the image policy, it is true they leave borders. Two of the images that you yourself uploaded here has them (well one no longer has it) and that was written in a time when thumbnails were used and empty spaces were shunned. I normally have to crop the borders off mine as well before uploading.--Cerez365™(talk) 15:57, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'll just quote each part I need to respond to.

“

Why or where exactly do you people get these sporadic fads from?

”

Nobody's getting any such fads. I think the reason people don't like 1080p images is because they don't bother buying a monitor that has a maximum resolution of 1920x1080 or higher. I don't know where you live nor do I care, but 1920x1080 is really the new standard for a large number of things these days. Even the latest Shippuden DVD's come as 1920x1080.

“

If the image is decent quality I see no need to be "1080ing" them.

”

Again, that's either because you don't have a 1080p capable monitor or you don't bother streaming at 1080p. I don't know if you realised, but Naruto Shippuden has been made for streaming at this quality setting. If you'd actually tried 1920x1080 resolution, you'd see that it has a major quality difference to the low resolution images that are found here.

“

What of the people that won't or can't pay to watch anime on sites that provide such resolution, can't get a 1080 video or systems are unable to play those videos are they supposed to do?

”

They can upload a 720p image and then wait for someone to update it to 1080p ? Plus, I'm sure all the people here can afford £5, it's really not that expensive for Crunchyroll. If you like Naruto so much, you should be supporting the industry instead of illegally obtaining the episodes that have lower quality.

“

Two of the images that you yourself uploaded here has them

”

A 2px black border does not distract the person from looking at the image...

“

I normally have to crop the borders off mine as well before uploading.

”

I don't really see a reason to do that on all the episodes beyond 53 in Shippuden, when the series has been designed specifically for about 1080p HD streaming.

Conclusion: The only reason you are against 1920x1080 images is because of an insignificant 2px border that does nothing to detriment the image in any way and because (IMO) you have no monitor capable of 1920x1080 resolutions. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:13, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

So, in order to use Narutopedia and be a "valuable contributor" in any way, people should go out and buy a larger monitor? You's also do well to note that 1080p images/videos have nothing to do with screen resolution they're two different things. I can have a 500x500 sized image that's 1080 pixels.

My monitors are "1080p" capable and just like you, I used to be foolish enough to pay for subscription to Crunchyroll just to get decent images. I don't stream and also please provide a source for "made for streaming at this quality setting" if you're going to perpetuate it so much.

That's exactly what I'm against editors having to run behind others and reupload the same image for no valid reason. Just because some might be able to afford it yes or no, doesn't mean people'll want to. You're talking about illegally obtaining things then you shouldn't be on this wikia since it, within itself, is in a moral grey area of illegalities. In the first place none of these images should be here because they're under copyright and intellectual property rights.

A 2xp border doesn't distract anyone yes, but still it's not liked in the images that are used here.

"CONCLUSION": You have an elitist mentality. Most of your suggestions for change on the wikia have all been about excluding groups of people from being able to contribute to the wikia... Even if I didn't have a system that was able to view 1080p videos that only goes further to prove my point. Sure the images do look nice with higher pixelation quality (which is barely noticeable) and the borders are never an issue since if you can have a "1080p screen" then you must have enough common sense to be able to use a cropping tool (buy photoshop while you're at it) and get rid of a border. Making a rule like that to me, is utterly unnecessary.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:38, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

An unnecessary amendment. The resolution of an image is meaningless, what is important is what the image is depicting. This also means it's not necessary change a characters image just because of its resolution. Change to a higher resolution? Acceptable. Change to an entirely new picture just because "it's in shiny HD!" is not.

But what I hate most of all is how people tend to become pissant little jerks when resolution is brought up. That is what I hate about this fad, yes it is a fad. Means of watching Naruto 1080p has existed for a while and only in the last 2 weeks has uploaders decided "everything should be in HD", but that I can live with. But what I can't and I hate is when people say "Well your monitor sucks, this is clearly the better image". This wiki is not a place for you to wave your e-peen and boast about your computers tech. We are a encyclopedia.

And I am well aware I am ranting, and it's not directed at Speysider, but this whole fad in general.--TheUltimate3(talk) 16:47, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

That is exactly what I have been trying to say. It's either I'm not that good at expressing myself as I thought I was, or else, I'm apparently a favourite moving target for attack.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:52, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

@TU3: This so called fad of uploading every single damned image in HD has only been triggered by idiots trying to copy and follow me for some really unnecessary reason. I'm not directing this at any particular person. I don't get how my suggestions in other pages to update the image quality to HD or to at least a more acceptable quality means every single bloody (yes I'm having to use an expletive) person who uploads needs to copy me by following suit. It's annoying and I think that's why Cerez responded like that. All I am trying to do is make the wiki better for everyone and I'm doing so by using 1080p images from the proper resolution of 1920x1080 (yes I know you can upload 1080p images from any resolution, but that isn't true 1080p HD in any forum) because they look cleaner and easier to depict. My image suggestions have been to improve the depiction of the image, without changing anything major but I get yelled at for no reason. My only suggestion to the rule is something like "Images captured at 1080p HD (1920x1080) are preferred over other images but it is fine to use any resolution of image if it isn't possible to capture at that resolution"

@Cerez: Nobody is attacking you, it's just that you are being very high and mighty because you have more edits and think your voice is more important than mine. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:54, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

Really? How exactly am I acting high and mighty? When I try to tell you newcomers how stuff is done here and such? I'd really like to know so I can stop doing it. I simply responded with what I believed to be my opinion about the suggested change. My voice carries no more weight than someone else who joined the wikia two seconds ago giving an opinion, neither does anyone else's but again as soon as an Admin says "no" or "yes" you're done but if someone else that doesn't have Admin attached to their names says something that displeases you, you rip into them and their lesser-than computers...--Cerez365™(talk) 17:01, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

Because the admins have the final say in everything ? Also, your high and mighty attitude was quite obvious in your bullet point list above. Plus, I'm not a newcomer so don't treat me as one. --Speysider (Talk Page) 17:03, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'll be sure to dumb down everything with smiley faces from now on yes? ^_^ --Cerez365™(talk) 17:09, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I dunno if your being sarcastic or not. But anyway, I'll just quote something that people missed above:

“

My only suggestion to the rule is something like "Images captured at 1080p HD (1920x1080) are preferred over other images but it is fine to use any resolution of image if it isn't possible to capture at that resolution"

Whats the point of this disscussion? If it is possible for someone to upload a 1080p HD image, why won't he. People upload lower quality images only because its not possible for them to do so. --Salil(talk) 17:29, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I would just like to make a point of mentioning that I'm not looking for an argument, nor am I saying that every single person should have a powerful desktop / laptop, a very good connection and a 1080p HD ready monitor. All I'm suggesting is that if there's the possibility of uploading a 1080p HD image to replace a lower quality image, then that should be allowed.

@Salil: The point of this discussion is to add in a bit saying that 1080p HD images are preferred, but they are not a complete requirement for every image if it isn't possible to obtain one (eg the whole of the original Naruto and the first 50 or so Shippuden episodes). All I'm saying is that people can upload images at any resolution they want, but if it is possible to update the image to 1080p, people who are able to should be allowed to do so. --Speysider (Talk Page) 17:32, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the two of you should discuss this on private, because there is something more here involved than the resolution, where this discussion only served as a starting point for a potential misunderstanding to express ones anger and/or jealousy? --Vecanoi (talk) 18:09, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorta done though lol. It's up to others to put in their two cents now and see where we go from here.--Cerez365™(talk) 18:13, May 3, 2012 (UTC)

@Vecanoi:Almost there.

Okay, here's what can I say. WE DON'T NEED TO PREFER 1080p. Not everyone could upload an image like that. Not to sound rude or somewhat...

“

You have an elitist mentality. Most of your suggestions for change on the wikia have all been about excluding groups of people from being able to contribute to the wikia.

”

You know wikia is an open site. We can all contribute. You don't need a rule to prefer 1080p because whatever image as long it has a good quality is allowed. *sighs* Manga is better. All you need is raw and tankobon.

“

An unnecessary amendment. The resolution of an image is meaningless, what is important is what the image is depicting. This also means it's not necessary change a characters image just because of its resolution. Change to a higher resolution? Acceptable. Change to an entirely new picture just because "it's in shiny HD!" is not.

But what I hate most of all is how people tend to become pissant little jerks when resolution is brought up. That is what I hate about this fad, yes it is a fad. Means of watching Naruto 1080p has existed for a while and only in the last 2 weeks has uploaders decided "everything should be in HD", but that I can live with. But what I can't and I hate is when people say "Well your monitor sucks, this is clearly the better image". This wiki is not a place for you to wave your e-peen and boast about your computers tech. We are a encyclopedia.

You know wikia is an open site. We can all contribute. You don't need a rule to prefer 1080p because whatever image as long it has a good quality is allowed. *sighs* Manga is better. All you need is raw and tankobon.

”

And again, I'm not saying that "if you upload an image that isn't 1080p, it's gonna get deleted", you are completely missing the point. I am merely suggesting that if a 1080p image is available, then it should be used, not discarded. --Speysider (Talk Page) 07:10, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I know what did I say? Speysider you are all welcome to use 1080p. Salil will start using it as well. —IndxcvNovelist (Talk to Me|My Wiki) 07:23, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

You said this:

“

WE DON'T NEED TO PREFER 1080p. Not everyone could upload an image like that.

”

That makes it sound as if you don't want 1080p images. --Speysider (Talk Page) 07:26, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

If that is what it seems, I am not against the 1080p thing. I prefer best qualities of image. My point is just not everyone could upload that quality. —IndxcvNovelist (Talk to Me|My Wiki) 07:36, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

I know, I'm not expecting everyone to upload 1080p images. All I'm suggesting is that if someone uploads an image and there's a 1080p version available, the 1080p version should be used instead of the lower quality image. --Speysider (Talk Page) 07:44, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

And that's not the issue. Uploading a higher quality image of the same image was always acceptable. The issue became "Lets change this good image to this 1080p image just because its in 1080p!"---TheUltimate3(talk) 11:15, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that when I do upload a higher quality image, it just gets reverted for minor issues that don't change the image in any form. --Speysider (Talk Page) 11:16, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

Userpage

Why is it a violation to use an image you don't upload? I know it's to be used in articles but how about setting a limit? Example we are allowed to use three-five images we don't own as sometimes simply there are very good images --S@lil(T@lk) 04:31, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

It's a copyright violation. Fair use images are licensed only for the use in the article, they have not been licensed, and never will be, for use on your userpages. Just because you think they are good images does not exempt you from copyright law. I vote for no and I'm sure many will say the same. --Speysider (Talk Page) 07:28, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

I already predicted your answer. As Salil said there is a limit. And the images are created by the user who uploaded it in this wiki. For the love of God, explain it why it violates the copyright law. I don't see a reason why because it's just used inside the wiki. Thank you. —IndxcvNovelist (Talk to Me|My Wiki) 07:42, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

The fair use tag? I dont think its anything more than a text with an image. Use of images is not allowed anywhere. As said by someone, We are working in the grey area --S@lil(T@lk) 07:50, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

“

And the images are created by the user who uploaded it in this wiki.

”

BS. None of the users here created the images on the wiki, they are screenshots so they are the property of the copyright owner. Whoever made the image policy must have a clear reason as to why the images cannot be used in userpages. --Speysider (Talk Page) 07:56, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, only the Studio Pierrot has the rights about anime screens, and Kishimoto about paper manga images. No one here have the rights about those images since they come from copyrighted works. Otherwise, it's different for users own creations like ShounenSuki's renders. So, if you want to use images for your user page, you should try to change the law here that doesn't allow images on user pages, that's all, copyright have nothing to do in this case. Iruka-dono (talk) 15:56, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

Thats what I am saying. We use them in articles then why not on userpages?--S@lil(T@lk) 16:05, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

Because a userpage is about the editor. You did not make the Naruto series in either anime or manga form. The law states we may use them for informative reasons about the character: you can't put them on your userpage because people will think you made the series. Iruka-dono got it right. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:07, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

“

So, if you want to use images for your user page, you should try to change the law here that doesn't allow images on user pages, that's all, copyright have nothing to do in this case.

We know that, you don't need to keep repeating yourself... The userpage is a page about you. If you use Naruto anime/manga images there, then you are basically saying you made the Naruto anime or manga, which you didn't and hence it's copyright infringement. That's my opinion as to the reasoning of this rule. I doubt it'll change. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:15, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

Well, finally its the decision of the admins ^_^ --S@lil(T@lk) 16:18, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

The only reason people are allowed to have images on their userpage is as a catalog of their contributions to the wiki (to know the quality of images they upload etc.), if the image no longer serves a purpose on the wiki, it will be deleted regardless if it is used on a userpage. They are not meant for "flavoring" a userpage. — SimAnt 18:37, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

If you see people using Naruto images on their userpage, report them. --Speysider (Talk Page) 18:35, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

New policy ?

I assume that now we have a new homepage in the works, it would be a good idea to add something to the image policy, something that indicates not to add an image to the episode infobox until a decision is reached by the community on the episode's talkpage. --Speysider (Talk Page) 11:20, May 17, 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, I don't believe this has to be written into policy, it can just be wikia culture.

Secondly from what I've seen it'll take forever for people to make a simple decision about an image and given that this is supposedly supposed to be in the name of the new homepage, yet it takes more than a day to come to a decision about a single image? Therefore I'm more for simply putting an image in there that "matches the description/title" and then discussing possible changes if necessary. There is no art to this, so there's no need to overcomplicate a decorative image.--Cerez365™(talk) 13:08, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

No need for new policy, Cerez is right, having a discussion on what picture to put up will just lead to decades of pointless debate.--TheUltimate3(talk) 13:26, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

The whole point of a discussion is so we're not spamming changes to the image needlessly. Hence, it's better if the discussion is done and the image added as quickly as possible. The problem with this image was me being unable to find the higher resolution version due to an upload I was doing. I think it should just be a wiki culture not a policy. --Speysider (Talk Page) 15:14, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

………So the fact that there was no image in the infobox for a whole day… was because you couldn't get to upload a higher resolution of the images that were offered as candidates- which as they are now… are perfectly fine? Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds? --Cerez365™(talk) 15:25, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

It was fine for people to add their own since the decision was made, but when I got the chance I would've uploaded the 1080p version. If you have a problem with that, then I can't help you. --Speysider (Talk Page) 15:28, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Yes I do have a problem with it, you're basically saying that this wikia should come to a standstill because you're doing something else and can't get the opportunity to upload a 1080p version of the infobox image? This wikia was operating long before either you or I came here and it'll apparently contrary to your belief, it'll continue going even when you and I aren't here. Preaching that "because of the homepage" actually annoys the hell out of me that you're using my own words to perpetuate your cause. One whole day without a proper image, a long-assed discussion which will probably go on into attempt 100 and constant image changes because you were doing something else and couldn't get to upload a 1080p image? That is utter rubbish.--Cerez365™(talk) 15:49, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Now I'm definitely sure you have no life and continually go out of your way to attack everything I post on this wiki. Nowhere in hell's bloody name have I ever said any such thing. Everyone is free to make their own decisions, they can add their own images and I'm not stopping them from doing it. I'm just pointing out that I'd probably replace it with the 1080p equivalent. Stop trying to push your own images and reject everyone else's and just let other people try to help. All your doing is pushing people away from trying to contribute anything here since they have the fear your just going to attack them for no reason at all. --Speysider (Talk Page) 15:54, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

I'm the one trying to push my images or is it you? You're the only one on here going on about 1080p 1080p with the exception of one other infrequent user. You've been told it's unnecessary yet here you are still doing it...

Pushing which people? You care to point out these "people" you're so fond of talking about? Because my only issue is with you and your ridiculous fad. There's nothing wrong with uploading images in 1080p but when it's unnecessary and hinders the wikia's progress then that's when there's an issue.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:18, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

I will respond only to the last sentence because the rest is you attacking me for no reason whatsoever. The wiki's progress is NOT BEING HINDERED BY SOMEONE UPLOADING A 1080P IMAGE! Anyway, I'm done with this discussion, you have ruined it yet again by your constant need to argue with me 100% of the time. To end this, why don't you compare this image of mine with the current image and tell me which is the better quality image. --Speysider (Talk Page) 16:26, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, "attacking" you. Put more plainly, you don't have a valid reason or rationale behind anything you've been doing. The site is not being hindered? Then answer one question again... why was it that no image was in the infobox for Sai and Shin for a whole day again? Because if that's not being a hindrance I don't know what is. As for the two images, I see absolutely no reason why the one uploaded by IndxcvNovelist couldn't have been used in the infobox yesterday. The way you talk about 1080p is as if there is some wondrous difference in image quality to be beheld when it's used, when in fact there is very little if any at times.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:38, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Administrative Delcaration

And now is the perfect time for me to flex my administrative muscle and tell everyone that this has gone on for far to long. If you think it has or has not, the Image War will end now.

1: Take a good look at the images we have up now. Under no circumstances, will these images be changed for a period pending one (1) month.

An image is old and can be replaced with a "high-quality" image? Tough. It will not change.

Don't like a characters image? Tough. It will not change.

2: Any and all Image Proposals are closed, following the declaration above. No change will be reflected in the articles.

3: Any move to circumvent the above two declarations will result in a week long suspension.

4: New images are allowed to be uploaded and placed into articles as normal, as long as they do not replace any existing picture in the article.

Example; next episode of Naruto airs and screenshots are taken, they can be uploaded as normal.

Example; New episode airs and a screenshot Naruto Uzumaki using Shadow Clone Technique is taken, that image will not replace any picture of the Shadow Clone Technique in Naruto's article or the techniques.

This declaration is effective immediately. Have an issue, take it to my talk page only. Any where else be in violation of Declaration 2 and will result in a week long suspension.

I think you might want to drop this on a forum/announcement page so that everyone can see it.--Cerez365™(talk) 19:10, May 18, 2012 (UTC)

Wrong ratio'd images

I recently created a template for use on images which are in the wrong ratio. However, I don't know whether something about using the proper ratio's should be added to the Image policy or not. I see a heck of a lot of uploads by one or two users are in the wrong ratio, distorting the depiction and it's distinctly irritating. --
SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 22:46, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

The template is very wordy. It should focus on what the incorrect ratio is, and what the correct one should be. Add to many words to it and minds start to wander.--TheUltimate3(talk) 23:41, June 8, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but duplications are already reverted and what not. If word that duplications are pointless needs to be added to the policy then it should already be there, but I get the feeling there is more to it than that.--TheUltimate3(talk) 15:01, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

It's not duplications in the sense of reuploading over the existing image, but downloading an image, saving it in another format, then uploading that new image to the site, when it's a clear duplicate of another. See this user's contributions for an example. and afaik, there is nothing listed there regarding reuploads of the exact same image, the same dimensions with no difference. --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 15:15, September 26, 2012 (UTC)

Videos on this wiki

Hi All, I wanted to get in touch with you about images on this wiki. I noticed videos are mentioned once or twice on the policy page, but I was not able to find an explicit policy relating to video. Recently here at Wikia we have entered into new partnerships with video content providers so we can offer wikis legally licensed videos on your wikis. Just yesterday I posted a blog post on central listing many of the details, which you can find here. One content area we are now working on is Anime. I wanted to get in touch with you here to find out more about the types of videos you might be interested in: Whole episode, trailers, clips, interviews, etc? I would love some insight, as well as to chat with the community about if and how you would like to start integrating video here. Thanks in advance for your feedback and please let me know any questions you may have. --Sarah(help forum | blog) 19:57, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

If any kind of video uploading system was enabled here, it would be abused. And uploading whole episodes here would be dumb as what you have suggested is copyright infringement (only Crunchyroll, Viz Media and Hulu have the right to distribute Naruto content). As mentioned somewhere else, videos just don't really work with the kind of wikia this is. The only way that we would be allowed uploads is if this was recognised as an official Naruto Wikia, which it isn't because it hasn't been licensed as one. Technically the images on the wiki are illegal and are only allowed here due to fair use. Video footage would most certainly not be allowed unless explicit permission was sought. And the chances are, the license holders would never give permission for uploading video content. :/ --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 20:12, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

Just to be clear, we are actually in conversations directly with a few of the companies you mentioned. We don't have any final deals, but are working to get the rights to offer you legally licensed videos from them. Would that be of interest? You can see what we have for naruto now here.

For our Related Videos Module, we do have the ability to limit videos to only those we have licensing for (so those in our Wikia Video Library). Let me know other questions you have. --Sarah(help forum | blog) 20:20, September 28, 2012 (UTC)

I think it all comes down to who can provide the licensed videos and the ones who add them. If everyone is able to upload a video, there will be trouble. The areas I can see this working are movie and video game, with trailers and promotional videos. Maybe ending and opening theme songs. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 02:38, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yup. I think it is possible to restrict the uploading to a particular group, right? 11:45, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

I'm still skeptical. This just seems like something that can snowball into...bad territory.--TheUltimate3(talk) 11:53, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree. At first I didn't see the functionality of it on this wikia but Omni did point out a few good areas. If it is possible to limit the video uploading, to a specific group, I wouldn't be against us trying it, granted that the feature can be removed if requested.--Cerez365™(talk) 12:34, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Yes we can restrict video uploads to a specific user group, along with restricting it to only premium content. As I said, the conversations with content providers is just starting up, so it may take a little bit to get access to more content. If you are willing to test though, we can enable it whenever you are ready. Let me know what other concerns you have. Cheers, --Sarah(help forum | blog) 18:25, October 1, 2012 (UTC)

Also the Infobox tabber works with videos, if anyone is interested in that... — SimAnt 19:33, October 1, 2012 (UTC)

Can it be turned-off on request? 00:56, October 2, 2012 (UTC)

In this limited rollout we can enable and disable. We have not defined the sitewide rollout yet, so I can not make a guarantee for the future. We are actively taking feedback and updating the module based on current users feedback (such as the limiting of non-premium videos, admin only video upload, and more). Let me know if you would like to try this out now. We are also working hard to get more anime content (just takes a while to work out deals). Thanks! --Sarah(help forum | blog) 18:57, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

Re-uploading

As it seems, history is about to repeat itself with another set of users, therefore as it pertains to the policy of re-uploading there seems to be a few things that must be addressed in the policy:
→ clear explanation of when to re-upload

e.g why an infobox image may be cropped

→ reuploading images because of poor vs inferior quality

poor= images is pixelated etc

inferior= 720p vs. 1080p

→ explanation of what can be done when special tags are added to images

think that some people have it wrong because recently another user declared basically that once one of those tags are added to an image it essentially becomes untouchable.

Any way, I think its high time we clearly define these things before another plague attacks the wikia.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:09, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

I'm simply trying to get something standardised and in writing telling other editors that this is how they should proceed. Any way for anyone interested, I've drafted a possible overhaul for the re-upload section.--Cerez365™(talk) 17:24, January 28, 2013 (UTC)

All these fall under the same label, reuploading

What we already have:

The only case where you should make use of the re-upload feature is when you are uploading a better quality image of the same image (same media, same episode/chapter, same scene/page, same basic frame of the episode/manga) on top of another.

So, we can perhaps add something like:

However, this doesnot generally apply to images which are of good quality i.e. the images which distinctly and clearly show the object which they are expected to (character, jutsu, etc). This is unneccessary and leads to nothing but only revert wars.

But I doubt its usefulness since there will always be Wikilawyering (in general) wherever you go.

For the tags... I am not sure what you mean.~ UltimateSupreme 07:09, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Kinda why I was thinking of something with more details, maybe some sub-headings and such which can be posted in those templates some users make use of when people violate a policy:

== Re-uploads ==
Re-uploading, by definition, is uploading a new file over an existing one on the wikia. In order to re-upload a new image over an existing one, you will need to navigate to the image details page. Towards the bottom of the page, the option to "Upload a new version of this file" will be located underneath the "File History" section. However, re-uploading should only be done under a few circumstances. Note, however, that there are circumstances where these guidelines may need to be circumvented, therefore, always leave as clear, and detailed a reason for re-uploading as possible.
* When you upload an entirely new image, do not overwrite any existing images. Always upload new images under a new filename. Uploading images over other images messes up the image page's history and makes it hard to discern between images with proper tagging, and images without tagging that were uploaded over top of images that had proper tagging, which results in an incorrect rationale being left on the page.
* Make use of the re-upload feature is when you are uploading a better quality image of the same image (same media, same episode/chapter, same scene/page, same basic frame of the episode/manga) on top of another. This of course does not hold for images uploaded under an entirely different filename, depicting a different point in the same scene.
* Images can be re-uploaded if one is of a '''poorer''' quality i.e the image is blurry, the ratio is off, black bars are present on the sides of the image, or overall, when re-uploaded, there's a drastic change in the image's appearance.
** Try not to re-upload images for unnecessary reasons such as one image being 720p vs. 1080p when there is little to no difference between the two images. The images are supposed to depict a character, scene, ability etc. there is no need to attempt to make every blade of grass in the image visible, no matter how pretty it is. This usually leads to unnecessary revert wars and unproductive time spent on the wikia.
* Infobox images are generally cropped for the simple reason that they look much better when "squared" in the infobox as opposed to being widescreen.
* Re-uploading with manga images are a bit different. Generally, English scans are the first to be uploaded, Japanese scans are generally reuploaded over these followed by tankob?n images when released.
* This wikia has started placing templates onto images that are uploaded in 1080, 720p. The general instructions of these templates are to be followed, that is to say:
** An image initially uploaded in any of these formats should not be re-uploaded with an image of inferior quality.
** If it is a case where you have found an image that is better suited for the depiction of the situation or say an infobox image needs to be cropped, simply upload the image under a new filename or else save the image, crop, and re-upload under a new filename.

Of course this can be edited as any one feels a mind to, if there's anything that was missed, or needs to be corrected or excluded.--Cerez365™(talk) 15:34, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Only bit that isn't really necessary to be included is this:

Try not to re-upload images for unnecessary reasons such as one image being 720p vs. 1080p when there is little to no difference between the two images. The images are supposed to depict a character, scene, ability etc. there is no need to attempt to make every blade of grass in the image visible, no matter how pretty it is. This usually leads to unnecessary revert wars and unproductive time spent on the wikia.

These are rarely started and are usually started by people who don't listen to anyone else so it's not necessary to put this in as it's a sporadic thing and should be dealt with as it occurs.

Other bit that should be edited is this:

An image initially uploaded in any of these formats should not be re-uploaded with an image of inferior quality.

IMO, if somebody uploads an image in 720p, but another user finds one in 1080p, then the 1080p image should stay because it's better quality and larger resolution. However, it should not be the converse where somebody uploads a 1080p and another user finds a 720p because 720p is inferior to 1080p, but 1080p is superior to 720p. --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 15:52, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Everything that I put in writing this are things that people have literally said in the past with the re-uploading of images because of inferior quality. Of course it can do without the sarcasm, though I thought the explanation was necessary because that is exactly what started the whole issue. So if someone uploads an image in 720 there's no need to get it in 1080; avoid the situation altogether and let the image alone. As for the second point, the statement holds true either way you turn it. Upload a 1080 don't substitute with one of inferior quality. Same goes for 720's. Images aren't things that people ogle at all day to be noticing drastic changes in quality, they are there to support content. --Cerez365™(talk) 16:04, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Based on what I saw in a recent image conflict, I added the definition of re-uploading so what is written in the policy isn't abused like that again. Also, bump.--Cerez365™(talk) 08:16, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

When did you become a Sysop to decide that the discussion is finished by editing a policy ? Only one other user agreed with you and that does not count as a real community decision. Please leave the policy alone until more discussion comes from this rather than arbitrarily making decisions based on one user. Maybe the reason people aren't responding is that they don't care about making the change or are just too busy or think this is being nitpicky about a random occurrence that happens from time to time and doesn't need to be written as a policy. --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | My Wiki | Channel 14:18, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

If you're not going to actually contribute to the discussion shut up and don't bring your hypocrisy to me. You went as far as to add a link to your own page on a policy once, so you don't have a leg to stand on here, at all. I merely did that so that it would draw people's attention to the change and hopefully have more people actually contribute to the discussion. This was started on the 28th of January and I've been the only contributor since the 29th. Seemed like ample enough time to me and nitpicking or not it's a necessary change like I said in the beginning.--Cerez365™(talk) 14:23, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

Before this escalates into something stupid. How about people not you two throw their hand into the discussion.--TheUltimate3(talk) 15:36, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

And if that wasn't obvious, both of you no longer add anything to this until others do. I am serious.--TheUltimate3(talk) 15:37, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, I cannot stress this enough I don't even care if you will comment on acknowledging this comment, just do not say anything.--TheUltimate3(talk) 15:38, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I've gotta interject here. Since when does silence indicate the outcome of the discussion ? This discussion is not finished so the policy should NOT be updated. Put it back to what it was before. Nobody responded to this discussion because they don't care about making this change because it's not necessary. Only ONE person agreed to your change Cerez, that does not constitute a decision being made by the community. --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | Channel 14:31, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, did my message of "I don't want either of you talking in this talk page until other people contribute" come out in Chinese? Is my skill in Mandarin suddenly fly to untold levels where I didn't even notice that I'm speaking Chinese?--TheUltimate3(talk) 16:25, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

It did not, I felt it necessary to post a message here because Cerez asked UltimateSupreme on his talkpage to change the policy, because nobody responded on this talkpage. Because nobody responded here, clearly nobody cares about updating the policy, which doesn't even need to be updated at all. --SpeysiderTalk Page | My Image Uploads | Tabber Code | Channel 16:29, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

I fully intend to catch up on this, but it'll take a bit, since I travel tomorrow. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 23:37, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know I posted the question 11 days ago. Three people in total actually responded to the topic and a fourth contributed edgewise. That, dear Speysider, is the "community" in that discussion. A discussion doesn't sit in perpetuity waiting for everyone to respond to the discussion; you yourself say it may be a case where no one simply cares so why would we sit around and wait for everybody to contribute to it? Instead of actually contributing to it, raising your concerns or whatever, you stalk the discussion? Ask anyone, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the protocol that was followed. Any way, since Omnibender's expressed an interest in contributing to the discussion when he's done jet-setting, I'd be more than happy to wait for that.--Cerez365™(talk) 16:30, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Bump for the last time. Essentially this discussion has been hanging in limbo for nearly a month now which is usually never not the case. Omnibender has stated interest in contributing, and until then, the stats are:

Two for, I believe one is against the entire thing/part (I am not sure, the contributor never made their sentiments known), one contributing edgewise (that means not directly for or against the improvement.--Cerez365™(talk) 22:24, March 1, 2013 (UTC)

I mostly agree with what was said until now. Regarding the image resolution, I think there's one possible exception to 720 vs 1080 that needs to be discussed first. While unlikely, I do think it's possible for there to be a better quality 720 over a 1080. I could, for example, have a very poorly focused image in a 1080 resolution. Those cases would be exceptions, since I highly doubt we'd ever find ourselves in such a situation. In that case, either the 720 would prevail, or a better 1080 would need to be uploaded. Omnibender - Talk - Contributions 03:21, March 2, 2013 (UTC)